🏈 Ivan Maisel: "By beating Notre Dame, Alabama becomes college football dynasty."

TerryP · Dec 25, 2012

Alabama nearing football's pantheon

Alabama is attempting to do what no program has done in the BCS era: win a third national championship and cross the threshold into a dynasty. It has been 15 years since a program last did so. Tom Osborne, dogged for two decades as the coach who couldn't win the big one, led Nebraska to its third big one in four seasons and retired as the Cornhuskers coach.

And now Nick Saban has brought the Crimson Tide to the precipice of matching Nebraska. No. 2 Alabama, with a defeat of No. 1 Notre Dame in the Discover BCS National Championship on Jan. 7, would become the first team to win a third national title since the BCS began in 1999.

That third crystal football is the key that will unlock the door to the pantheon of college football. We have identified eight dynasties that have ruled the sport in the modern era (beginning in 1936 with the Associated Press poll, the most widely accepted measure of a champion in the pre-BCS era). By happy accident, the dynasties spaced themselves apart, arriving at the rate of one per decade until the onset of the BCS.

The AP poll and the coaches' poll that began in 1950 provide the yardstick by which to measure a dynasty: three national championships in a several-year span, with superb records in the interim. Notre Dame (1946 to 1949) and Nebraska won their three in a four-year span, as Alabama is attempting to do. Others, such as USC (1967 to 1974), won three across several seasons.

The bottom line is that the metric of three national titles chose itself, because history has shown it's so hard to accomplish. The list of schools that won national championships in a short period of time is much lengthier.

.....

The odds of Alabama becoming a dynasty have narrowed considerably as the Crimson Tide have whittled their task down to one game. Should Notre Dame upset Alabama, the Tide still would have an opportunity to create that dynasty. But the task of achieving it would expand from winning one game to winning 14 next year. Even that is a bargain. When the FBS schools begin the four-team playoff in 2014, the national champion likely will have played 15 games, nearly double what Minnesota played when it established its dynasty more than 70 years ago.

ESPN's Ivan Maisels column

RollllTide! · Dec 25, 2012

Ivan can make a statement without the truth. Bear Bryant should be included in this article 1961, 1964, 1965 per Ivans rules. It seems to me that there will always be writers that do not want to promote the truth or create a term and try to define it with their own belief.

I don't believe that a dynasty is defined that way. A dynasty is defined as Webster says:

a succession of rulers of the same line of descent or a powerful group or family that maintains its position for a considerable time

Based on that the Dynasty's of Football is already defined as Michigan, Notre Dame, USC, Ohio State, and Alabama, No Order defined.

0LDSCH00L · Dec 25, 2012

I really can't argue with Ivan Maisel's assessment... :bluebiggrin::bluebiggrin::bluebiggrin:

bamafan4ever · Dec 25, 2012

RollllTide! said:
Ivan can make a statement without the truth. Bear Bryant should be included in this article 1961, 1964, 1965 per Ivans rules. It seems to me that there will always be writers that do not want to promote the truth or create a term and try to define it with their own belief.

I don't believe that a dynasty is defined that way. A dynasty is defined as Webster says:

a succession of rulers of the same line of descent or a powerful group or family that maintains its position for a considerable time

Based on that the Dynasty's of Football is already defined as Michigan, Notre Dame, USC, Ohio State, and Alabama, No Order defined.

Good points I didn't think of while reading this article. To further your point, if you add the 1966 team to the other years you listed, that was pretty darn near a dynasty if not. I know we didn't win the MNC in '66 but Coach Bryant considered it one of his best teams. This is the year that ND got a lot of love even though Michigan St. tied them in one of their most famous games. Though they were ranked number 1 and 2 going in the game, logic was that BAMA would leap to number 1 after the ND/MSU tied and did not go bowling. BAMA dumped a good Nebraska team in the Sugar but ND won the MNC anyway. Just about as big of screw job in that time frame and the reason why a lot of the oldtimers have a hard time with ND.

planomateo · Dec 25, 2012

RollllTide! said:
Ivan can make a statement without the truth. Bear Bryant should be included in this article 1961, 1964, 1965 per Ivans rules. It seems to me that there will always be writers that do not want to promote the truth or create a term and try to define it with their own belief.

I don't believe that a dynasty is defined that way. A dynasty is defined as Webster says:

a succession of rulers of the same line of descent or a powerful group or family that maintains its position for a considerable time

Based on that the Dynasty's of Football is already defined as Michigan, Notre Dame, USC, Ohio State, and Alabama, No Order defined.

Check that "past dynasties" half way thru the article, it lists Bama twice.

http://espn.go.com/ncf/feature/video/_/id/8756283/num/11

Twice As Nice

Bryant was fond of saying that, "Losing doesn't make me want to quit, it makes me want to fight that much harder." At the University of Alabama, Bryant didn't suffer through too many losses. It's remarkable that over a 25-year career in Tuscaloosa he lost just 46 games, an average of about two per season. It's one of the reasons Bryant is the most revered football coach in Alabama history, and among the top coaches in the history of college football. His record at UA speaks for itself: 232-46-9. He won an SEC record 146 games, 13 conference titles and went 12-10-2 in bowl games. His teams had two dynastic runs -- 1961-'66 and 1973-'79 -- that each won three titles.-- Alex Scarborough

bamafan4ever · Dec 25, 2012

planomateo said:
Check that "past dynasties" half way thru the article, it lists Bama twice.

http://espn.go.com/ncf/feature/video/_/id/8756283/num/11

Thanks. That's what I get for speed reading the article. Glad he included '66 in that range of years as well.

RollllTide! · Dec 25, 2012

0LDSCH00L said:
I really can't argue with Ivan Maisel assessment... :bluebiggrin::bluebiggrin::bluebiggrin:

Sorry I didn't read the article, I just read the quote. I still believe his definition is wrong. The Dynasties have already been defined, and Alabama is one of them. Probably Alabama has moved ahead of Michigan.

planomateo · Dec 25, 2012

Poorly written I suppose, as a reader I would have preferred to have them listed in chronological order. He says there were 8, but leaves the reader wondering when and who for probably half of the 8.

TerryP · Dec 25, 2012

planomateo said:
Poorly written I suppose, as a reader I would have preferred to have them listed in chronological order. He says there were 8, but leaves the reader wondering when and who for probably half of the 8.

I saw a tweet asking Maisel if he's listing dynasty's why didn't he include FSU. His response was "stay tuned."

I take that to mean he'll have a follow up article coming shortly.

0LDSCH00L · Dec 25, 2012

RollllTide! said:
Sorry I didn't read the article, I just read the quote. I still believe his definition is wrong. The Dynasties have already been defined, and Alabama is one of them. Probably Alabama has moved ahead of Michigan.

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/rankings/all_time_team_rankings.php

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/rankings/lastxyears_team_rankings.php?period=Last 5

RollllTide! · Dec 26, 2012

0LDSCH00L said:
http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/rankings/all_time_team_rankings.php

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/rankings/lastxyears_team_rankings.php?period=Last%205

<tbody>
[TH="width: 40, bgcolor: #A00020"]

Rank

[/TH]
[TH="width: 150, bgcolor: #A00020"]

Team

[/TH]
[TH="width: 95, bgcolor: #A00020"]

TotalPoints

[/TH]
[TH="width: 95, bgcolor: #A00020"]

Win. Pct.

Points

[/TH]
[TH="width: 95, bgcolor: #A00020"]

Schedule Points

[/TH]
[TH="width: 95, bgcolor: #A00020"]

Nat. Champs Points

[/TH]
[TH="width: 95, bgcolor: #A00020"]

Big 4 Bowl

Points

[/TH]

[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: #E1D2D2"]

1

[/TD]
[TD="width: 150, bgcolor: #E1D2D2"]

Alabama